Is Verizon using active power control on AMPS?

On Thu, 04 Dec 2003 05:01:58 GMT, Al Klein <rukbat@pern.org> wrote:

>On Wed, 03 Dec 2003 00:03:51 GMT, nospam@home.com (Larry W4CSC) posted
>in alt.cellular.verizon:
>
>>Ever been burned leaning against the door of a ham HF mobile station?
>
>Door? No. Bitten on the lip by a mic, though. Many times. Even
>bitten on the finger by a bug.
>
My first transmitter was a homebrew novice rig, a 5Y3 rectifier and
6V6 xtal osc (screen grid)/power amp (plate output). One of its
problems was the cathode keying on the key "hot" terminal was about
70VDC when the key was open.....OUCH!

As to the RF in the shack, I bring all cables to an aluminum plate
with feed-thru coax connectors going through it from all the antennas
bolted firmly to a ground rod at the base of the tower. Bleeds off
the induced RF from the pair of 4-1000As I used to run...(c;

Power IS our friend....(c;


Larry W4CSC

NNNN

 

On Thu, 04 Dec 2003 17:41:12 GMT, nospam@home.com (Larry W4CSC) posted
in alt.cellular.verizon:

>As to the RF in the shack, I bring all cables to an aluminum plate
>with feed-thru coax connectors going through it from all the antennas
>bolted firmly to a ground rod at the base of the tower. Bleeds off
>the induced RF from the pair of 4-1000As I used to run...(c;

Hi SWR can sometimes cause a bit of RF on the shield no matter how
solid the ground is.

>Power IS our friend....(c;

Then, again, I've worked the world with less power than the filament
of that 6V6 of yours drew. CK718s can be our friends too.

 

On Fri, 05 Dec 2003 02:24:51 GMT, Al Klein <rukbat@pern.org> wrote:

>On Thu, 04 Dec 2003 17:41:12 GMT, nospam@home.com (Larry W4CSC) posted
>in alt.cellular.verizon:
>
>>As to the RF in the shack, I bring all cables to an aluminum plate
>>with feed-thru coax connectors going through it from all the antennas
>>bolted firmly to a ground rod at the base of the tower. Bleeds off
>>the induced RF from the pair of 4-1000As I used to run...(c;
>
>Hi SWR can sometimes cause a bit of RF on the shield no matter how
>solid the ground is.

No, not the SWR INSIDE the cable, the induced RF voltage OUTSIDE the
cable. I used to work at a 5KW daytime AMer where the transmitter and
studios were located BETWEEN the towers. None of the flourescent
lights could be turned "off". Great fun when a new electrician is
rewiring something. The phone man refused to go work on the phone
system in our basement, what with the hot ground radials going through
over your head. We had all kinds of troubles with metal tag
automation, Scully I think it was. Damned RF made it go crazy!
>
>>Power IS our friend....(c;
>
>Then, again, I've worked the world with less power than the filament
>of that 6V6 of yours drew. CK718s can be our friends too.

Hmm...Never had a CK718. There's a CK722, the little blue Raytheon
transistor with the red dot near the emitter, in a glass box on my
desk. I even got a jpg of the CK722 original spec sheet if you'd like
it. My first transistor radio was a homebrew with CK722's in it. It
was an earphone AM TRF rig in a plastic box. I took it to school to
listen to the World Series in 6th Grade. After the Series was over,
my teacher asked, "Larry, where's your hearing aid.", and the jig was
up! She made me bring the radio back to school and the principal was
so proud of me listening to the first transistor radio he ever heard
they just couldn't prosecute me...(c; I just agreed not to bring it
to school, after it was displayed in the main display case for a
week....(c;


Larry W4CSC

NNNN

 

On Fri, 05 Dec 2003 02:41:10 GMT, nospam@home.com (Larry W4CSC) posted
in alt.cellular.verizon:

>Hmm...Never had a CK718. There's a CK722, the little blue Raytheon
>transistor with the red dot near the emitter, in a glass box on my
>desk. I even got a jpg of the CK722 original spec sheet if you'd like
>it.

The 718 had a higher cutoff frequency.

>My first transistor radio was a homebrew with CK722's in it. It
>was an earphone AM TRF rig in a plastic box.

My first one was a 1N34 into a pair of cascaded 2N35s.

 

On Tue, 02 Dec 2003 02:30:26 GMT, "N9WOS"
<n9wos@nobug.worldnet.att.net> posted in alt.cellular.verizon:

>The signal runs through the duplexer, and the duplexer will look like an
>open load to the PA when the antenna is shorted, or open.
>Unless the load matches the impedance of the duplexer, it will not
>transfer power.

Duplexer or circulator?

 

On Tue, 02 Dec 2003 23:58:00 GMT, nospam@home.com (Larry W4CSC) posted
in alt.cellular.verizon:

>That's what I'd suspect, here. None of my 3W phones ever drew less
>current as you got closer to the towers, or even to the "Cheater
>Repeater" over at VZW's store in the mall.

>Wanna bet we can saturate that repeater's output amp?....(c;

That's what's nice about older designs. We used to use the final of a
Motorola 450 MHz transmitter as a receiver pre-amp. Without a
physical connection you couldn't saturate the pre-amp, even with 80
watts a few feet away.

 

On Tue, 02 Dec 2003 06:09:42 GMT, "N9WOS"
<n9wos@nobug.worldnet.att.net> posted in alt.cellular.verizon:

>Another unit I have is a AMPS nokia car phone,
>that is not currently in use.
>It is a true 100% USDA approved car phone.
>It isn't even capable of being used as a bag phone.
>It is designed to be bracket mounted in the car.
>It has a deep fined heat sink running down one side of it.
>Size is 1.5 inches high, 5 inches wide and 8 inches long.

>It draws 200ma in idle.
>It draws 250ma in active mode
>it draws a good 1A in TX on low power.
>It draws a good 2.5A in TX on high power.

>It would be dissipating a good 35W when in
>TX mode with the car voltage regulator set to 14V
>All to get 3W output.
>Now that is inefficient!

Not for a "cell phone/car heater in bitter winter" combination device.
Mount it under the front seat and you can keep the heater off.

 

On Wed, 03 Dec 2003 00:05:28 GMT, nospam@home.com (Larry W4CSC) posted
in alt.cellular.verizon:

>That's not inefficient! My IMTS with tubes and a Dynamotor....THAT'S
>inefficient!!

>OF course, hearing the Dynamotor wind up as soon as you lift the
>receiver while its warming up the final filaments.....is cool!

Lessee. An old Motorola 80? Or 140?

The dynamotors on the old GE twins were nice. The torque could almost
turn the car over.

 

> >The signal runs through the duplexer, and the duplexer will look like an
> >open load to the PA when the antenna is shorted, or open.
> >Unless the load matches the impedance of the duplexer, it will not
> >transfer power.
>
> Duplexer or circulator?

That is like asking "Was it a car or a VW bug"
A circulator, in that application, is a duplexer.

800mhz Phones don't normally use circulators.
They are "moderately" large for the cellular and PCS bands.
And circulators are fixed frequency operation.
You would still need a band pass network to
isolate the circulators from each other.
(ie) 800Mhz and 1900Mhz.

A circulator will provide interesting results when
the unit becomes unbalanced.
But none of them good.

Any SWR or feedback from the antenna will go right to
the receive input.
If you disconnect the antenna, the phone's own transmitter will
fry the receiver unless a band pass filter is put infront of the RX section.

Normal units in cellular phones are band pass network type
(LC) duplexers.
The operation will vary by manufacturer.

Some will provide a direct translation of
the antenna to the respective inputs at the
respective frequencies.
If the output is shorted, it will show a
shorted input at the passband frequency.

Others are fixed resistance duplexers.
They have a multistage LC network that
presents a nominal transmission impedance.
If the output drops below that impedance, or above
that impedance, the input will decouple from the output.
(ie) Like a PI network in an antenna tuner
matching to the antenna to an HF radio.

Most cellphones I see have the fixed resistance duplexers.
That way, if someone messes up the antenna, it won't
fry the output amp by shorting it out.

And hand held phones use it to, because you can't keep a good
SWR when the outside environment is changing.

 

Do you remember how they used to dim the headlights until the
dynamotor got wound up to speed?....(c;



On Sun, 07 Dec 2003 06:50:00 GMT, Al Klein <rukbat@pern.org> wrote:

>On Wed, 03 Dec 2003 00:05:28 GMT, nospam@home.com (Larry W4CSC) posted
>in alt.cellular.verizon:
>
>>That's not inefficient! My IMTS with tubes and a Dynamotor....THAT'S
>>inefficient!!
>
>>OF course, hearing the Dynamotor wind up as soon as you lift the
>>receiver while its warming up the final filaments.....is cool!
>
>Lessee. An old Motorola 80? Or 140?
>
>The dynamotors on the old GE twins were nice. The torque could almost
>turn the car over.

Larry W4CSC

NNNN

 

On Sun, 07 Dec 2003 21:38:36 GMT, nospam@home.com (Larry W4CSC) posted
in alt.cellular.verizon:

>Do you remember how they used to dim the headlights until the
>dynamotor got wound up to speed?....(c;

Dim the headlights? They used to slow the car down until the
dynamotor came up to speed.

 

"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.org> wrote in message =
news:smmatvc3arpmj1686hfjtrfq1k07eljes6@Pern.rk...
> On Sun, 07 Dec 2003 21:38:36 GMT, nospam@home.com (Larry W4CSC) posted
> in alt.cellular.verizon:
>=20
> >Do you remember how they used to dim the headlights until the
> >dynamotor got wound up to speed?....(c;
>=20
> Dim the headlights? They used to slow the car down until the
> dynamotor came up to speed.

I had to mount mine transversely in my trunk.
Mounted longitudinally, it rolled the car so much,
it induced a torque-steering effect.
---JRC---

 

On Wed, 10 Dec 2003 00:33:04 GMT, "John R. Copeland"
<jcopelan@columbus.rRr.com> posted in alt.cellular.verizon:

>"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.org> wrote in message news:smmatvc3arpmj1686hfjtrfq1k07eljes6@Pern.rk...
>> On Sun, 07 Dec 2003 21:38:36 GMT, nospam@home.com (Larry W4CSC) posted
>> in alt.cellular.verizon:

>> >Do you remember how they used to dim the headlights until the
>> >dynamotor got wound up to speed?....(c;

>> Dim the headlights? They used to slow the car down until the
>> dynamotor came up to speed.

>I had to mount mine transversely in my trunk.
>Mounted longitudinally, it rolled the car so much,
>it induced a torque-steering effect.

Yes, I mentioned that earlier in the thread. The Motorola 140D gave
the car a noticeable kick. So did some other rigs.

 

On Wed, 10 Dec 2003 00:33:04 GMT, "John R. Copeland"
<jcopelan@columbus.rRr.com> wrote:

>"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.org> wrote in message =
>news:smmatvc3arpmj1686hfjtrfq1k07eljes6@Pern.rk...
>> On Sun, 07 Dec 2003 21:38:36 GMT, nospam@home.com (Larry W4CSC) posted
>> in alt.cellular.verizon:
>>=20
>> >Do you remember how they used to dim the headlights until the
>> >dynamotor got wound up to speed?....(c;
>>=20
>> Dim the headlights? They used to slow the car down until the
>> dynamotor came up to speed.
>
>I had to mount mine transversely in my trunk.
>Mounted longitudinally, it rolled the car so much,
>it induced a torque-steering effect.
>---JRC---

Yeah, but didn't that make the car wheelie when you keyed it up?...(c;

Larry W4CSC

NNNN

 

"Larry W4CSC" <nospam@home.com> wrote in message =
news:3fd72bf9.97717904@news.knology.net...
> On Wed, 10 Dec 2003 00:33:04 GMT, "John R. Copeland"
> <jcopelan@columbus.rRr.com> wrote:
>=20
> >"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.org> wrote in message =3D
> >news:smmatvc3arpmj1686hfjtrfq1k07eljes6@Pern.rk...
> >> On Sun, 07 Dec 2003 21:38:36 GMT, nospam@home.com (Larry W4CSC) =
posted
> >> in alt.cellular.verizon:
> >>=3D20
> >> >Do you remember how they used to dim the headlights until the
> >> >dynamotor got wound up to speed?....(c;
> >>=3D20
> >> Dim the headlights? They used to slow the car down until the
> >> dynamotor came up to speed.
> >
> >I had to mount mine transversely in my trunk.
> >Mounted longitudinally, it rolled the car so much,
> >it induced a torque-steering effect.
> >---JRC---
>=20
> Yeah, but didn't that make the car wheelie when you keyed it up?...(c;
>=20
> Larry W4CSC
>=20

Yep. Limited-Slip differentials rock!
---JRC---

 

On Wed, 10 Dec 2003 20:59:07 GMT, "John R. Copeland"
<jcopelan@columbus.rRr.com> wrote:

>
>Yep. Limited-Slip differentials rock!
>---JRC---
>
8,287 young Rice Rocket drivers just asked their chat room buddies,
"What's a 'Limited-Slip differential'?"

The got a wide variety of answers, some even related to muscle cars.


Larry W4CSC

NNNN

 

"Larry W4CSC" <nospam@home.com> wrote in message =
news:3fd7b1aa.32942300@news.knology.net...
> On Wed, 10 Dec 2003 20:59:07 GMT, "John R. Copeland"
> <jcopelan@columbus.rRr.com> wrote:
>=20
> >
> >Yep. Limited-Slip differentials rock!
> >---JRC---
> >
> 8,287 young Rice Rocket drivers just asked their chat room buddies,
> "What's a 'Limited-Slip differential'?"
>=20
> The got a wide variety of answers, some even related to muscle cars.
>=20
>=20
> Larry W4CSC
>=20

And a lot of those Rice Rockets are front-wheel drives!

I purposely avoided the trade name "Positraction", Larry.
But we always used to call it that, anyway, no matter who made it.
---JRC---